|
Chili posted:Yes. It was purposeful, but not informed as such. Wait, you're voting Rarity again. So basically it was like this: - You voted Rarity for a stupid reason - You realized it's stupid and unvoted - Then you found a different reason to vote Rarity (which is that she can't possibly have a read on Pig?) My vote stays.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 07:43 |
|
|
# ? Apr 26, 2024 04:42 |
|
So has the case on Rarity moved beyond "she said a thing, it's possible she wasn't being truthful so let's squint at it really hard and maybe we can figure out if it's a lie without any other context" yet? Other than CPig, who's offering the very helpful "she's scum."
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 08:21 |
Abyssal Squid posted:So has the case on Rarity moved beyond "she said a thing, it's possible she wasn't being truthful so let's squint at it really hard and maybe we can figure out if it's a lie without any other context" yet? Other than CPig, who's offering the very helpful "she's scum." Have you not been reading or did you genuinely miss the case on Rarity?
|
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 08:53 |
|
The whole last page looks like arguing in circles about the meaning of her saying "I'm Hadvar," if there's more to it than that then yes I missed it.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 08:57 |
Voting for Rarity because of the flavor claim, whether true or false, is pretty scrub tier play, to be honest. If there's another case in there, I'm not seeing it, so if you're voting for Rarity for a reason besides her claim, then please illuminate. While my initial vote on Chili was a joke vote, his behavior has made me feel sufficiently confident in leaving my vote where it is.
|
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 09:18 |
|
ShadowGlass posted:Wait, you're voting Rarity again. So basically it was like this: Yes.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 12:53 |
|
Sandwolf posted:Have you not been reading or did you genuinely miss the case on Rarity? Yeah.... I'm a wee bit troubled by this as well, but I'm not seeing scum as much ignorant.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 12:54 |
|
Meinberg posted:Voting for Rarity because of the flavor claim, whether true or false, is pretty scrub tier play, to be honest. If there's another case in there, I'm not seeing it, so if you're voting for Rarity for a reason besides her claim, then please illuminate. Except that I haven't done that thing you said, and I did make a case, albeit minuscule. I mentioned, specifically, that I thought Rarity was scum not for that first stupid thing but for a later scummy thing. That did happen. Whether or not you agree with the reason is a different matter.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 12:55 |
|
Asiina posted:These posts are bad, but I don't know if it's "new person saying a dumb thing and then hedging because they're new" bad or "new person saying a dumb thing and getting scolded by the scum team" bad. I really dislike this post from Asiina. It starts with a "hey, this might be newbie town or newbie scum, I can't tell", but finishes with a "would vote". It reads to me like she is definite on her opinion from the start, but wants an excuse for when Narc flips town.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 13:09 |
|
Byers2142 posted:You agree on flavorful posting from the grave, but what about my Ecco case? I think there's something there, she was just so sure when she went after Rarity, and she's filled in the why for that surety after the fact in a manner that seems scummy. I think this case is okay, but not amazing. Also, I have a gentleman's agreement with Ecco and my side of the agreement is to not immediately assume Ecco is scum on D1.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 13:22 |
|
Chili posted:Oh. Cool. Now I can just vote you because you're scum, and not because of the bullshit earlier. I agree with this.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 13:23 |
|
Votecount for Day 1 Chili (5): Meinberg, fiery_valkyrie, Abyssal Squid, Good Sir, ShadowGlass Rarity (4): EccoRaven, CapitalistPig, Sandwolf, Chili, Abyssal Squid (2): Glockenapfel, Epsilon Plus, CapitalistPig (1): Rarity EccoRaven (1): CapitalistPig, Byers2142 (0): Asiina, Glockenapfel, Opopanax (0): CapitalistPig, Meinberg (0): EccoRaven, Asiina (0): CapitalistPig, Epsilon Plus (0): CapitalistPig, Not Voting (6): AnonymousNarcotics, Asiina, AXE COP, Chic Trombone, Gabriel Pope, Opopanax With 19 alive, it's 10 votes to lynch. The current deadline is February 18th, 2015 at 8 p.m. EST -- that's in about 11 hours, 39 minutes.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 14:20 |
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:I really dislike this post from Asiina. It starts with a "hey, this might be newbie town or newbie scum, I can't tell", but finishes with a "would vote". It reads to me like she is definite on her opinion from the start, but wants an excuse for when Narc flips town. It seems pretty reasonable to me Those posts are pretty bad and the rest of AnonymousNarcotics's posting is really low content, so I'm definitely watching him. I'm re-reading Asiina's posts but I'm not really seeing anything that jumps out at me.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 15:52 |
|
Did anyone actually explain the case on Chili? I wanna vote for it if it's good. I am still ok voting for Rarity, and I'm not really going to vote for anyone else who has votes right now.fiery_valkyrie posted:I really dislike this post from Asiina. It starts with a "hey, this might be newbie town or newbie scum, I can't tell", but finishes with a "would vote". It reads to me like she is definite on her opinion from the start, but wants an excuse for when Narc flips town. I agree with this post as well and would vote Asiina. I am wondering who else would vote Asiina because I think this is like the third time someone has brought her up.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 15:54 |
|
I'm pretty sure it's because I came in hot.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 15:56 |
|
EccoRaven posted:Did anyone actually explain the case on Chili? I wanna vote for it if it's good. It started because he did this: Chili posted:Good Christ, I got town again. It’s literally been over 3 years since I’ve drawn scum. And because he's been riding Rarity pretty hard. Other than that I'm not really seeing it.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 15:58 |
|
If I get lynched today, it's whatever. Just get Rarity next.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:02 |
|
EccoRaven posted:I agree with this post as well and would vote Asiina. I am wondering who else would vote Asiina because I think this is like the third time someone has brought her up. I would, but like most everyone else it's more guts than anything specific I can point to. Chili posted:I'm pretty sure it's because I came in hot.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:02 |
|
Gabriel Pope posted:Other than that I'm not really seeing it. Yeah me neither. Chili posted:If I get lynched today, it's whatever. Just get Rarity next. Honestly I'm softening on Rarity a little bit. I'm interested in moving on if there's something better out there. Though it's not looking like there is.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:17 |
|
EccoRaven posted:Honestly I'm softening on Rarity a little bit. I'm interested in moving on if there's something better out there. Given the two-team make-up of the game, I toyed briefly with the idea of no lynching, but I think it makes even less sense here than normal. Here's my top three right now. Ecco, because I feel that her jump on Rarity was due to out of thread knowledge. Asiina, because she's just not right this game, like her stated opinions are not her true opinions or something. And Opop because he's being snipe-y in posting, looking for things to make one-off comments on that have no real bearing on the game.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:30 |
|
Byers2142 posted:Here's my top three right now. Ecco, because I feel that her jump on Rarity was due to out of thread knowledge.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:33 |
|
EccoRaven posted:Honestly I'm softening on Rarity a little bit. I'm interested in moving on if there's something better out there. I don't see a reason to soften. The only other player that's bothering me right now is Gabriel. I'll consider his/her posting for a bit and make a decision there soon.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:34 |
|
EccoRaven posted:How do you respond to all the very reasonable and sensible explanations for why I believe the mafias have mod-provided fakeclaims? Sure, you can say I am making up my reasons for voting Rarity going along - though I'd disagree - but how can you say the setup doesn't make mod-provided fakeclaims really obvious? Well hold on a second. If the mod is going to say that flavor may provide some game related information... that may very well mean that the scum don't necessarily have fake claims. It could be that the mod is intending for scum/anti-town players to overcome their potentially problematic flavor and has equipped them with tools to help with that. They could have janitored flips or something. Who knows? I wouldn't bank on the scum having fake claims.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:37 |
|
EccoRaven posted:How do you respond to all the very reasonable and sensible explanations for why I believe the mafias have mod-provided fakeclaims? Sure, you can say I am making up my reasons for voting Rarity going along - though I'd disagree - but how can you say the setup doesn't make mod-provided fakeclaims really obvious? Because I don't believe it did; in most flavor-heavy games that have provided fakeclaims to scum, the OP will say that. This OP did the opposite, saying to make flavor claims at our own risk. Therefore, I'd have not expected provided fakeclaims.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:41 |
|
Chili posted:Well hold on a second. If the mod is going to say that flavor may provide some game related information... that may very well mean that the scum don't necessarily have fake claims. It could be that the mod is intending for scum/anti-town players to overcome their potentially problematic flavor and has equipped them with tools to help with that. They could have janitored flips or something. Who knows? See? It's not obvious, but Ecco immediately went "yep, fakeclaims" and then backfilled the reasoning for why a town player would automatically expect fakeclaims. That reads like prior knowledge to me.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:42 |
|
Byers2142 posted:See? It's not obvious, but Ecco immediately went "yep, fakeclaims" and then backfilled the reasoning for why a town player would automatically expect fakeclaims. That reads like prior knowledge to me. That's actually an interesting take. Need to think on this one too.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 16:52 |
|
Byers2142 posted:Because I don't believe it did; in most flavor-heavy games that have provided fakeclaims to scum, the OP will say that. This OP did the opposite, saying to make flavor claims at our own risk. Therefore, I'd have not expected provided fakeclaims. What you're saying essentially is the mod is telling us not to claim our flavor because doing so hurts the scum. That's so bizarre and dumb. Here is a Primer on Flavor in a Mafia Game Mods often use flavor to make their game more fun. But when using preexisting flavor, doling out who is "scum" and who is "town" can be problematic. If you keep too consistent to the story, with the protagonists being town and antagonists scum, then when people flavor claim it becomes too easy to figure out the setup. A counter to that is mods will often make a "good guy" bad or a "bad guy" good and warn us "don't trust flavor!" But in a game like Skyrim, with no clear good or evil factions, there isn't that problem. The problem is going to be claiming someone who is a member of a faction, when that faction happens to be, in this game, scum. It would be nonsense for a mod to not give their players fakeclaims in that kind of game. Flavor matters in this game. The mod clearly didn't just make, say, Astrid town and some random villager a member of the Dark Brotherhood, otherwise the mod would have said "don't trust flavor it's just flavor." So, every scum player must be part of their respective faction. The way to avoid outing themselves is by giving them a fakeclaim. It's really actually quite sensible, and I'm sorry your brain didn't make these assumptions in the first few seconds of the game.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:38 |
|
The recent few pages have made me soften on my vote for Chili and consider Rarity. Also, I want to read over this case against Ecco but to me, at the moment, it seems like a real stretch. I do agree, I don't see any reason to think there are fakeclaims, rather if anything the OP seems to point in a completely different direction. Ecco - Have you been in a game previously that had fakeclaims? Is this some sort of post-mafia-stress induced anxiety? In the next couple hours I'm going to go back and re-read the entire thread then present what I think is my "best" argument which, being day one, won't be much more than a guess. Also, I been reading up on my Skyrim lore, and better understand my flavour and some of the other players' as well. I now understand why the first three or four pages of this thread didn't make sense.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:41 |
|
As an aside, that the mod gave the town as a whole flavor warnings, instead of just telling the scum privately, tells us that the flavor also probably hurts us in claiming it. Perhaps something like, Nord players can be recruited into the Stormcloaks, or whatever. Chili posted:It could be that the mod is intending for scum/anti-town players to overcome their potentially problematic flavor and has equipped them with tools to help with that. They could have janitored flips or something. Who knows? Sure, maybe the mafia have really problematic flavor, and if we all massclaimed day 1 the mafia would be in dire straights. Maybe the mafia have problematic flavor but they can janitor flips or steal other people's role characters or who the heck knows. But making a fakeclaim for the scum is just so much easier.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:42 |
|
Good Sir posted:Also, I want to read over this case against Ecco but to me, at the moment, it seems like a real stretch. I do agree, I don't see any reason to think there are fakeclaims, rather if anything the OP seems to point in a completely different direction. These points contradict themselves. If you think I'm crazy about the fakeclaims thing then the case against me isn't that much of a stretch, especially for a day 1 case. Good Sir posted:Also, I been reading up on my Skyrim lore, and better understand my flavour and some of the other players' as well. I now understand why the first three or four pages of this thread didn't make sense.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:46 |
|
EccoRaven posted:Here is a Primer on Flavor in a Mafia Game Yes, I know why fakeclaims may be given, but I disagree that they are required. I have played in flavor-heavy games where fakeclaims were not given to scum. I also feel that you do not believe as strongly about this as the post makes it seem you do. You've realized that your blunder is only explainable as town if you can say unequivocally that all flavor heavy games having a fakeclaim is required and a natural assumption all town players should make. Your last line stands out: EccoRaven posted:It's really actually quite sensible, and I'm sorry your brain didn't make these assumptions in the first few seconds of the game. You can't attack the argument because, as evidenced with Chili and me, it's not an immediate reaction. So you attack the players that don't make that jump as being slow in thought, specifically me here but all of the others by association. I stand 100% behind what I said. You made a jump based on scum knowledge. You are now trying to make it look like a jump town should have made after the fact. You are scum.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:49 |
|
Byers2142 posted:And Opop because he's being snipe-y in posting, looking for things to make one-off comments on that have no real bearing on the game. Hi Byers nice to meet you
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:49 |
|
Opopanax posted:Hi Byers nice to meet you Yeah, I'm tired of meta excuses for scummy play. I'm tired of meta arguments in genera; I feel they've come to over-dominate the game.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:52 |
|
Byers2142 posted:Yes, I know why fakeclaims may be given, but I disagree that they are required. Byers2142 posted:I also feel that you do not believe as strongly about this as the post makes it seem you do. You've realized that your blunder is only explainable as town if you can say unequivocally that all flavor heavy games having a fakeclaim is required and a natural assumption all town players should make. Again, Byers, if you're right - if the scum don't have fakeclaims and their flavor is actually really problematic if we know the scum flavor - then it's in the town's interest to do an effective mass flavor claim day 1, since then the scum is left outed. That is, the mod is telling us "don't claim flavor! It can hurt you!" and is probably lying because he's too lazy to find a handful of random villagers. That's so bizarre and dumb. Byers2142 posted:So you attack the players that don't make that jump as being slow in thought, specifically me here but all of the others by association.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:56 |
|
EXAKT Science posted:RULES It sounds like it could go one way or the other on fakeclaims. I suspect the "clues to role" is the real motivation behind the warning, as I'm guessing town power roles have very obvious flavor.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 17:57 |
|
I bet the two scum teams are The Imperials and The Stormcloaks
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 18:00 |
|
fiery_valkyrie posted:I really dislike this post from Asiina. It starts with a "hey, this might be newbie town or newbie scum, I can't tell", but finishes with a "would vote". It reads to me like she is definite on her opinion from the start, but wants an excuse for when Narc flips town. You don't have to be 100% on a case to vote. I'm not sure if they were just bad newbie town posts, but they were really scummy. I'm trying to give new people the benefit of the doubt though, so I won't vote for him today.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 18:01 |
|
Also, Update, I went to whiterun and just finished looting the castle/getting to the part where you go off with Irildra or whatever the gently caress her name is to go fight the first dragon.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 18:01 |
|
I mean let's reread this warning:da OP posted:Flavor will likely offer clues to role and/or alignment, so be VERY careful about making flavor arguments or claiming your flavor. If you really want to, you can, but don't say you weren't warned. I could see how someone could read this and think, "yeah, the mafias don't have fakeclaims, it says right there flavor is a clue for alignment." But I see this and think, because it was posted publicly, it's not directed specifically towards the mafia - it's for everyone in the game. It's telling the town that flavor matters. This is in contrast to a game where flavor doesn't matter - an X-Men game where Professor X is scum, for instance. In that kind of game nobody needs fakeclaims because there is a disconnect between source alignment and game alignment. In a game where flavor matters, the solution to scum being up against a wall with incriminating flavor is to give them fakeclaims. It's a really easy thing to do. I concede it's possible we are in a game where the scum are all Dark Brotherhood vs. Thieves Guild (or some other opposing pairs), and the scum have no fakeclaims, so as soon as someone says they're Astrid it's as good as scumclaiming, and the scum can't lie about their identities without potentially being counterclaimed or making a claim that doesn't fit with the flavor at all. It's certainly possible. But the alternative - that Exakt just gave them fakeclaims - is just so much more sensible.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 18:05 |
|
|
# ? Apr 26, 2024 04:42 |
|
EccoRaven posted:In the very post you're quoting I provide the second most common solution to flavor problems that doesn't require a fakeclaim. This is not my point. My case is that scum apparently do have fakeclaims, which you knew because you're scum. So you cased Rarity for using her provided fakeclaim, and then realized as town you would have no knowledge that there are definitely fakeclaims in this game. So you've backfilled a reason a town player might make the assumption you made. I have no interest in arguing the worth of fakeclaims in games right now, as it's a distraction from the matter at hand. It's irrelevant to my case, which is below. Fact: even in flavor heavy games, fakeclaims are not always provided. Fact: you immediately acted as though fakeclaims were in play. Supposition: you knew there were because in your scum role PM, you have a fakeclaim. Supposition: everything you've posted about fakeclaims since has been backfilling a reason for town players to act as you did. Two facts, two suppositions. None of this requires a primer on flavor or any of the other smoke you're throwing up right now.
|
# ? Feb 18, 2015 18:07 |